Get Command Templates

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and openWorldHint. The description adds valuable context by defining what command templates are (runtime templates that pass commands and evaluate responses) and clarifying the retrieval scope. It does not contradict annotations and provides behavioral context beyond them.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three sentences: a direct statement of function, a brief explanation of what command templates are, and a scope clarification. Each sentence earns its place with no redundant or vague wording.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

With no parameters, a rich annotation set, an output schema, and a clear description that covers both the definition and scope, the tool is fully contextualized. The sibling tools provide alternatives, and the description sufficiently distinguishes this one.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are zero input parameters, so the schema is trivially covered. The baseline for 0 parameters is 4, and the description does not need to explain parameter semantics. It appropriately omits any parameter talk.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states 'Get all command templates from Itential Platform', using a specific verb and resource. It distinguishes command templates from generic templates and from describe_command_template by emphasizing 'all' and noting retrieval from 'both global space and projects.'

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies usage by specifying 'all command templates' and the scope (global and projects), which distinguishes it from describe (single) and create/update operations. However, it does not explicitly name alternative tools or provide when-not-to-use guidance, so it falls short of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.